Feminists Make Better Mates Claim New Study by Feminist

According to a study by a Rutger's professor, if it's lovin' you're craving: date a feminist, you'll be ravin'.

Or something like that. From the City of the Big Shoulders comes the following story about a big study: "Feminists Make Better Mates" in the Chicago Tribune.

Take a feminist out to dinner.

That's the advice of a social psychologist who concludes in a new study that feminists make better partners and have stronger romantic relationships.

Laurie Rudman of Rutgers University had found in earlier research that negative stereotypes of feminists--that they're unattractive, man-hating lesbians, in a nutshell--cause young adults to distance themselves from the "F-word" and tone down their demands for equality. A majority of college-age respondents agreed with such statements as "Most men would probably not want to date a feminist" and "Romance depends, in part, on men being allowed to be in charge."

So, the stereotype that feminists are unattractive is just so much bullhockey? It may be so, but if the study group includes feminists of the radical kind, we'd say there's reason to be skeptical of the study's findings. That's leaving aside the fact that the study's author, Dr. Rudman, was alarmed by news that feminists were perceived to be unattractive. And forget the fact that there are no facts--the data itself is largely subjective. It's like proclaiming Howard Dean the president after looking at fund-raising and polling data from 2003.

Oh wait. There were those who actually did that.

Maybe they qualified for grant money for a study, too.

Back to the notion that feminists are unattractive man-haters. We picked out some photos of who's listed in Wikipedia under "Feminists". Those are the pictures you see accompanying this story. Are these famous feminists femme fatales?

We'll leave that for the reader to judge. But as stated before, Rudman was alarmed.

This was alarming to Rudman, who is old enough to remember the heyday of the women's rights movement in the 1970s. Continued efforts to achieve gender equality could be seriously hurt, she reasoned, if women (and men) think it comes at the expense of love.

The story goes on--and on and on.

Someone is alarmed that there's a stereotype that feminists are an unappealing lot, does a study where the "measurement" involves asking people what they think, then publishes the results.

Voila! Proof that feminists are really closet Paris Hiltons. This "proof" will be little consolation to the feminists who spend next Saturday night at home with a gallon of Haagen-Dazs reading Rudman's study.

Read the Tribune's story. If you are so inclined, find the study and read it. Maybe re-read this story. Then make up your own mind. That seems to be the fairest way. Besides, this story is at its end.

Looking for pictures of attractive feminists "proved" to be exhausting work.